1 1 2 3 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT 4 Special Session 5 Thursday, May 2, 2019 6 9:00 a.m. 7 Commissioners' Courtroom 8 Kerr County Courthouse 9 Kerrville, Texas 78028 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: ROB KELLY, Kerr County Judge HARLEY BELEW, Commissioner Precinct 1 24 TOM MOSER, Commissioner Precinct 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Precinct 3 25 DON HARRIS, Commissioner Precinct 4 2 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 NO. PAGE 3 *** APPROVAL AGENDA: 4 1.1 Pay Bills. 3 5 1.2 Budget Amendments. 3 6 1.4 Approve Payroll. 4 7 1.5 Court Orders. 6 8 1.6 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 7 action regarding pending litigation. 9 *** Adjournment. 13 10 *** Reporter's Certificate. 14 11 * * * * * * 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 JUDGE KELLY: Okay, it is Thursday, May the 2 2nd, 2019 at 9 o'clock in the morning, and the Kerr 3 County Commissioners' Court is now in session. This is 4 our bill pay docket. I know we've got a few reports I 5 think we need to talk about, so let's begin with item 6 1.1 on pay the bills. Joy. 7 MRS. JOHNSON: Good morning. For Kerr 8 County we have $153,517.97. For other entities -- I'm 9 sorry. Other funds for the Treasurer to disburse, Adult 10 Probation $1,420.26. The Airport $1,607.00. Juvenile 11 Probation $104.00. Fund 78, which is the County Clerk 12 fees, $338.00. And fund 95, 198th DA forfeiture 13 account, is $132.02. 14 JUDGE KELLY: For a total of one fifty-seven 15 one nineteen twenty-five, right? 16 MRS. JOHNSON: Yes. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Motion to approve the 18 disbursements as presented. 19 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Second. 20 JUDGE KELLY: Been motioned by Commissioner 21 Letz, second by Commissioner Harris to approve the 22 expenditures as presented. Any further discussion? 23 Those in favor raise your hand. Unanimous, five zero. 24 Item 1.2 on the agenda are the budget 25 amendments. 4 1 MRS. JOHNSON: There are three. The first 2 one is for Constable 2, and the next two are -- I'm 3 sorry. Number two is for Courthouse Security, and 4 number three is Public Relations Department. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Move for approval of 6 the budget amendments as presented. 7 COMMISSIONER BELEW: Second. 8 JUDGE KELLY: Been a motion by Commissioner 9 Moser, seconded by Commissioner Belew to approve the 10 budget amendments as presented. Any further discussion? 11 Those in favor raise your hand. Opposed? Unanimous, 12 five zero. 13 Item 1.3 late bills. 14 MRS. JOHNSON: There are none. 15 JUDGE KELLY: Item 1.4 approve payroll. 16 MRS. JOHNSON: The total amount of payroll 17 is $813,193.79. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And the reason for 800 19 as opposed to 500 is why? 20 MRS. JOHNSON: TCDRS is paid once a month. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay. Move for 22 approval to pay the payroll. 23 JUDGE KELLY: Been a motion by Commissioner 24 Moser, seconded by Commissioner Letz to approve the 25 payroll as presented. Any further discussion? 5 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tom, I think you ask 2 that question -- or Commissioner, you ask that question 3 every meeting. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, because there's a 5 different answer. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- 7 JUDGE KELLY: Well, sometimes there is a 8 different answer. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: There is a different 10 answer. No. It's because there was an extra pay period 11 or something like that, so anyway -- 12 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Joy likes questions. 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: She appreciates being 14 informative. 15 JUDGE KELLY: The transparency is good. 16 Okay, item one point -- and everybody's got 17 their payroll up here to pick up? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did we vote? 19 JUDGE KELLY: We got a motion? 20 COMMISSIONER BELEW: We did not vote. 21 JUDGE KELLY: You made the motion, right? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I seconded. 23 JUDGE KELLY: And you seconded. Those in 24 favor raise your hand. Five zero. Go ahead and put 25 these up here so the Auditor can pick them up. 6 1 JUDGE KELLY: Item 1.5 court orders? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, we do have court 3 orders. And on the meeting of April 29th, I'm just 4 going to read the Court order, make sure that we all are 5 comfortable with the actual wording. Approved to 6 authorize the Human Resource Department to correct the 7 step and grade pay for seven current employees as 8 previously discussed. That "as previously discussed", I 9 think it's maybe what we actually said, I'm not sure, 10 but that seems an odd way to phrase it to me. 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Why do we even have to 12 say "as previously discussed"? Why can't we say 13 approved? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Need to say pay for 15 seven current employees, maybe just leave it at that. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, yeah, period. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER BELEW: So that has to be 19 changed, amended or -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So we'll amend 21 it, and change that. With that being said, I make a 22 motion that we approve court orders from April 25th 23 court orders 37442 through 37445, and court orders from 24 April 29th, court orders 37446, as amended, through 25 37447. 7 1 COMMISSIONER HARRIS: Second. 2 JUDGE KELLY: Been a motion by Commissioner 3 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Harris to approve the 4 court orders as revised in one, and as presented by the 5 others. Is there any further discussion about the court 6 orders? Those in favor raise your hand. Five zero, 7 unanimous. 8 (Information Agenda.) 9 JUDGE KELLY: Okay, then on the addendum to 10 the agenda is item 1.6, and that's consider, discuss and 11 take appropriate action regarding pending litigation. 12 Is this something we need to do in executive session. 13 MR. REEVES: When I asked for it to be on 14 the agenda, it was pending. After talking to the County 15 Attorney, I think we can discuss this in open session 16 now, if that's all right with y'all. 17 For once coming up with litigation, I bring 18 good news. Last Friday when I returned from the 19 courthouse security meeting, had an e-mail from Eric 20 Magee who is a partner with Allison, Bass & Magee. 21 These are the attorneys that TAC had assigned us in the 22 Federal lawsuit that Kerr County, along with a number of 23 other counties were involved in over the citizenship 24 issue of voting. Recall in February I was subpoenaed 25 for testimony in Federal Court, and I informed the 8 1 Commissioners' Court of the actions going on. We were 2 subsequently named in the lawsuit, I think along with 8 3 other counties, the Secretary of State, and some other 4 governmental entities. The Plaintiffs were League of 5 United Latin-American Citizens, as well as ACLU, and 6 Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund, so all of those 7 were the Plaintiffs. I received the e-mail Friday from 8 our attorney, and I'll read brief portions of it. 9 On April 1 our office, being the legal 10 counsel, met with the counsel for all of the Plaintiffs 11 and the Secretary of State to discuss a possible 12 settlement of this case. At that meeting the Plaintiffs 13 and the Secretary of State discussed ways to resolve 14 various issues, but no agreement was reached at that 15 time. 16 Subsequent to April 1st, the Secretary of 17 State and the Plaintiffs met to try to work out a 18 settlement. Last week they received a draft settlement 19 between the Plaintiffs and the Secretary of State that 20 included the actions that the Secretary of State would 21 have to take. There was one item on it that asked that 22 the County Defendants, of which we were one of them, to 23 send a letter provided by the Secretary of State within 24 five days of the execution of the settlement agreement. 25 On the night of April 24th they received -- 9 1 they, being legal counsel for the County, received a 2 draft settlement agreement that still only required us 3 to, being the County Defendant, to send a letter within 4 such five days. The State though was insisting that the 5 settlement agreement be executed by all County 6 Defendants by April 26th. Our legal counsel explained 7 to them, because of 72-hour notice requirements that 8 this could not happen; therefore, the Plaintiffs and our 9 counsel worked together, and those were our counsel's 10 words that the Plaintiffs worked together to find a way 11 to dismiss the County, all counties, from the suit so we 12 wouldn't have to sign a settlement agreement. 13 One of the stipulations, and we received 14 this letter Friday, was that letters to all people that 15 were involved in the original dispute in Kerr County, 16 the 86 individuals who may have had citizenship 17 questions, that we send a letter that we would no longer 18 be looking into their citizenship based on what we had 19 originally received from the Secretary of State. Our 20 counsel drafted the letter. I met with County Attorney, 21 and the stipulation those letters had to be mailed by 22 Friday afternoon. This was about 12 o'clock. I pulled 23 staff out of the city elections, I pulled staff out of 24 County in Motor Vehicle and the letters went out by 3 25 o'clock. We're thus dismissed from the lawsuit, we're 10 1 not part of any of the settlement, and we are not 2 required to pay any legal fees on behalf of the 3 Plaintiffs. 4 If you read the press articles State of 5 Texas had to pay $450,000.00 in legal fees to the 6 Plaintiffs, so we have been dismissed from the suit, we 7 weren't part of the settlement. There's nothing in the 8 settlement that the Secretary of State nor the letter 9 that our counsel told us to send out that prohibits us 10 from investing any potential person for being ineligible 11 to vote as long as it is outside the document that 12 Secretary of State sent in January of this year. 13 So a long story short, the suit is settled, 14 we were dismissed from the suit, and I feel like we can 15 move on with the business at hand that we have now. 16 So as I said, our legal counsel provided the 17 letter, so we don't have to worry about maybe the 18 wording is not right. They provided the letter in 19 English and in Spanish, which we are required to send, 20 and all letters have been sent out at this time. 21 I believe the Judge had been copied on the 22 attorney's e-mail, and he and I met Friday afternoon 23 after the letters were sent out, and we wanted to bring 24 it back before the Court to let all of y'all know. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So the procedure and in 11 1 assuring the people are residents of the United States 2 to vote, they just simply sign the thing and that's your 3 proof that that's -- 4 MR. REEVES: They are signing a sworn 5 statement. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 7 MR. REEVES: Now, with that said, whether it 8 was anything else, if there is evidence brought before 9 us such as a person has registered to vote, then they're 10 summoned for jury duty and they claim that they're not 11 eligible to serve on the jury because they're not a 12 citizen, then we get that notice from District Clerk or 13 whoever the office may be, and then we can follow up on 14 the situations like that. The only thing that we are 15 prohibited from doing is basing it simply on the 16 information that was sent out by the Secretary of 17 State's office in January of this year. 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay, good. Thanks. 19 Very good, good news. 20 JUDGE KELLY: Anything else? So the State 21 is paying their attorney's fees, right? 22 MR. REEVES: The Plaintiffs attorney's fees, 23 that's correct. 24 JUDGE KELLY: That's what it's always about. 25 MR. REEVES: And TAC were the ones that 12 1 assigned ours through our Risk Management. And just to 2 say something, this is one great thing about being a 3 member of TAC and having the insurance pool of Texas 4 Association of Counties that covers us. A lot of times 5 on insurance, we only think about property or health or 6 something like that. This is one of the great things 7 that we get out of TAC, and I'm sure the Sheriff can 8 mention this, too, because of the legal counsel. There 9 is a deductible, but this is one great thing that I feel 10 like TAC supports. The counsel that represented us, all 11 they do is represent governmental agencies. I believe 12 they actually represent the Commissioners and County 13 Judges Association as well. So institute the horn for 14 TAC. 15 JUDGE KELLY: And just for the record so 16 that we're all crystal clear, all we had to pay was our 17 deductible of $10,000.00. 18 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Yes. 19 MRS. STEBBINS: And part of what TAC did 20 during this time was agree to represent the counties 21 that were involved, and the public information requests 22 that were being made by the Plaintiffs, that's what 23 started this initially -- started the representation of 24 the County, too, that they took that on as part of it. 25 And they don't usually do this, but they agreed and TAC 13 1 agreed that this was important for them to handle 2 everything, including the public information request so 3 that there was a unified front on behalf of all the 4 counties they represented. So that was an extraordinary 5 thing for TAC to do at that time, and I really 6 appreciate them. 7 JUDGE KELLY: And my final footnote on it 8 is, what started this whole thing had nothing to with 9 us. We did not do anything to initiate it. Everything 10 came out of Austin. And that's where all the shots are 11 being called these days are in Austin. We're happy to 12 get out of it as well as we have. 13 So is there anything else? Okay, then we 14 will stand adjourned. 15 * * * * * * 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 1 STATE OF TEXAS * 2 COUNTY OF KERR * 3 I, DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD, Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter in and for the State of Texas, and Official 5 Reporter in and for Kerr County, do hereby certify that 6 the above and foregoing pages contain and comprise a 7 true and correct transcription of the proceedings had in 8 the above-entitled Commissioners' Court Approval Agenda. 9 Dated this the 17th day of May, A.D. 2019. 10 11 /s/DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD Certified Shorthand Reporter 12 No. 953 Expiration Date 04/31/2020 13 * * * * * * 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25